Sep 27, 2019 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
Today, at the close of the 42nd regular session of the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva, the ICJ and other NGOs highlighted key acheivements and failures.
The joint civil society statement, delivered by International Service for Human Rights (ISHR) on behalf of the group, read as follows (not all text could be read aloud due to time limits):
“The Council reaffirmed that reprisals can never be justified. Council members rejected attempts to weaken the text including attempts to delete the references to the roles of the Assistant Secretary-General and the Human Rights Council Presidents. The resolution listed key trends such as the patterns of reprisals, increasing self-censorship, the use of national security arguments and counter-terrorism strategies by States as justification for blocking access to the UN, acknowledged the specific risks to individuals in vulnerable situations or belonging to marginalized groups, and called on the UN to implement gender-responsive policies to end reprisals. The Council called on States to combat impunity and to report back to it on how they are preventing reprisals, both online and offline. The Bahamas and the Maldives responded to this call during the interactive dialogue and we encourage more States to follow their good practice. We also encourage States to follow the good practice of Germany and Costa Rica in raising specific cases of reprisals. The Council also welcomed the role of the Assistant Secretary-General and invited the General Assembly to step up its efforts to address reprisals and ensure a coherent system-wide response.
We welcome the creation of a Fact-Finding Mission (FFM) on Venezuela as an important step towards accountability for the grave human rights violations documented by the High Commissioner. We urge Venezuela to cooperate with the FFM and to honor the commitments they have made during this session, including by allowing OHCHR unfettered access to all regions and detention centers and implementing their recommendations. Cooperation and constructive engagement and measures for international accountability and justice should be seen as complementary and mutually reinforcing.
We welcome the renewal and strengthening of the mandate of the Group of Eminent Experts on Yemen, sending a clear message to parties to the conflict – and to victims – that accountability is at the center of the mandate, and providing a crucial and much-needed deterrent to further violations and abuses. States should support the recommendations made by the GEE in their recent report, including prohibiting the authorization of transfers of, and refraining from providing, arms that could be used in the conflict to such parties; and clarifying the GEE’s role to collect and preserve evidence of abuses.
We welcome the renewal of the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on Cambodia, but regret that calls to strengthen the mandate of the OHCHR to monitor and report on the situation have been ignored. We regret that the resolution fails to accurately depict the continuing crackdowns on civil society and the severity and scale of recent attacks on the political opposition.
We welcome the renewal of the mandate of the Commission of Inquiry on Burundi. Its work is vital as the country heads towards elections in 2020. The Burundian Government should desist from denial and insults, and should cooperate with the Commission and other UN bodies and mechanisms.
We welcome that the EU and OIC have jointly presented a resolution on Myanmar requesting the High Commissioner to report on the implementation of the recommendations of the Fact-Finding Mission at HRC 45. However, the international community needs to take stronger action to ensure accountability for and cessation of grave international crimes, in particular by referring Myanmar to the ICC and imposing a global arms embargo – and by acting on the FFM’s reports, including those on economic interests of the military and on sexual and gender-based violence in Myanmar and the gendered impact of its ethnic conflicts.
The joint EU/OIC resolution on Myanmar welcomes the FFM report on the military’s economic interests, which identifies companies contributing to abuses. The High Commissioner, however, has still not transmitted the database of companies facilitating Israel’s illegal settlements more than 2 and a half years after its mandated release. The High Commissioner pledged in March to fulfil the mandate “within the coming months”. The ongoing unexplained and unprecedented delays have become a matter of credibility, for both the High Commissioner and the HRC. Mr. President, we request that you confer with the High Commissioner and advise as soon as possible when this important Council mandate will be fulfilled.
‘Cautious optimism’ best defines our approach to Sudan. While this year’s resolution, which welcomes the peaceful popular uprising, renews the Independent Expert’s mandate, supports the opening of an OHCHR country office, and highlights the role and needs of civil society, is an improvement on 2018, significant challenges remain. Ensuring accountability for the perpetrators of grave human rights and humanitarian law violations should be a central priority for the new Government, and the Council should assist in this regard.
We regret the lack of Council action on Kashmir and urge the Council, as well as India and Pakistan, to act on all the recommendations in the report of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights.
On terrorism and human rights, we are deeply disappointed that Mexico and other States have partially acquiesced in attempts by Egypt to dilute or distract the work of the Special Rapporteur on counter-terrorism away from its appropriate focus on human rights violations while countering terrorism and human rights of victims of terrorism. We regret that States have asked the Special Rapporteur to spend the limited time and resources of the mandate, to comment on the overbroad concept of the “effects” of terrorism, by which Egypt and some other States seem primarily to mean macroeconomic, industrial, and investment impacts, rather than the human rights of individual victims. The length to which States seem willing to put the existing Special Rapporteur’s mandate at risk, in the name of protecting it, while failing even to incorporate stronger consensus text on human rights issues included in the most recent merged parallel resolution at the General Assembly, suggests that the merger of the previous Mexican and Egyptian thematic resolutions no longer holds any real promise of positive results for human rights.
We welcome the adoption of the resolution on the question of the death penalty, which is an important reflection of the movement towards the international abolition of this cruel punishment. Significantly, this resolution reiterates and affirms the position of international law that the abolition of the death penalty is an irrevocable commitment and that an absolute prohibition exists to guard against its reintroduction. We also welcome the acknowledgement of the ‘most serious crimes’ threshold that acts to restrict the death penalty, in States that have yet to abolish it, only to crimes of extreme gravity; this resolution plainly identifies that criminal conduct that does not result directly and intentionally in death can never meet the threshold test and can never serve as a basis for the use of the death penalty. We are very pleased to acknowledge that the adoption of this resolution is complimentary to the General Assembly’s resolution calling for an international moratorium on the death penalty and, together, they serve to illustrate the advancing global commitment to abolition.
We welcome the Council’s renewed attention to the protection of the right to privacy in the digital age: fully integrating human rights into the design, development and deployment of Artificial Intelligence, machine learning technologies, automated decision-making, and biometric systems, is essential to safeguard not only the right to privacy, but also to freedom of expression, peaceful assembly, and association, and economic social and cultural rights.
On human rights in the administration of justice, we welcome the focus in this year’s resolution on concrete measures to prevent and respond to violence, death and serious injury in situations of deprivation of liberty, which illustrates the potential of thematic resolutions to set out specific practical, legal and policy steps that can be drawn on by governments, civil society, and other stakeholders to have real positive impact at the national level.
We commend Australia for its leadership on Saudi Arabia, as well as the other States who stood up for women’s rights activists and accountability. We urge more States to live up to their commitment to defend civil society and sign the statement in the coming 2 weeks.
We appreciate the attention paid by individual governments to the situation in China, including the dire situation facing Uyghurs and other Turkic Muslims; the crackdown on human rights defenders, including those working to draw attention to violations of economic, social and cultural rights; and the suppression of fundamental freedoms in Tibet. However, we deplore that the Council and many of its members have once again failed to take decisive action to ensure monitoring and reporting on the human rights situation in the country, especially Xinjiang, and press for access for the High Commissioner.
For five years since the last joint statement in March 2014, the Council has failed to hold Egypt accountable for continuing systematic and widespread gross human rights violations. In the latest crackdown on peaceful protests, reports indicate that more than 2000 people have been arrested in the past week. When will the Council break its silence and convene a Special Session to address the grave and deteriorating human rights situation in Egypt?”
Signatories:
- International Service for Human Rights (ISHR)
- DefendDefenders (the East and Horn of Africa Human Rights Defenders Project)
- Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative (CHRI)
- CIVICUS: World Alliance for Citizen Participation
- Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies
- Asian Legal Resource Centre
- Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA)
- International Commission of Jurists (ICJ)
- Amnesty International
- Association for Progressive Communications (APC)
- Human Rights Watch
- International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH)
Sep 27, 2019 | News
The ICJ today called on the Egyptian authorities to respect and protect the right of Egyptians to the freedom of expression, association and assembly, and ensure that all those arbitrarily detained over the past week in the context of recent protests against President Abdel Fattah Al-Sisi’s rule are immediately and unconditionally released.
On 26 September, the Office of the Public Prosecutor issued a statement confirming the detention of more than 1000 people following their “participation in protests” and “confessions” that their participation is related to “their dissatisfaction with the economic situation in the country,” and “opposition to the regime.”
Documentation by local NGOs indicates that as many as 2000 people may have been arrested, and that most of them were charged with “belonging to a ‘terrorist group’ and “distributing false information through social media aiming at disturbing the public order and opinion.”
“Egyptians taking to the street in protest are defying six years of Sisi’s government rampant corruption, relentless repression, and systematic dismantling of the rule of law and accountability safeguards,” said Said Benarbia, ICJ MENA Director.
Benarbia added, “By filling prisons with those purportedly dissatisfied with the situation in the country, Egypt’s prosecutors and judges are acting, yet again, as a docile tool of repression rather than a shield against the military’s crackdown on human rights and fundamental freedoms.”
As the country braces for new protests today, the ICJ is deeply concerned that Egyptian laws place overly restrictive limitations on the exercise of the right to freedom of assembly and give security forces sweeping powers to disperse protests, including by using lethal force when it is not strictly necessary to protect lives.
Six years after the killing by the armed and security forces of more than 1,000 individuals in the context of the dispersal of the Rabaa’ Al-Adawyia and Al Nahda Square sit-ins, the ICJ notes that not a single person has been brought to justice for the mass killings of protestors.
“Egyptian security and armed forces have a long history of recourse to unlawful and disproportionate use of force, including firing with live ammunition into crowds,” said Benarbia.
“They must comply with Egypt’s obligations under international law and guarantee the rights of protesters to life, to be free from torture and other ill-treatment, and to freedom of assembly, association and expression,” added Benarbia.
Contact:
Said Benarbia, Director of the ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, t: +41-22-979-3817; e: said.benarbia(a)icj.org
Download:
Egypt-free detainees-News-Press releases-2019-ARA (press release in Arabic, PDF)
Sep 24, 2019 | News
The ICJ today called for the immediate release of lawyer Mahienour al-Massry and hundreds of peaceful protestors who have been arbitrarily arrested by the Egyptian authorities in the context of recent protests against government corruption and President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi.
On 22 September 2019, Mahienour al-Massry was arrested by plain-clothes police officers outside the Supreme State Security Prosecution headquarters in Cairo, after representing five detainees in judicial investigations.
The next day she was brought before the same Supreme State Security Prosecution on unknown charges.
The detainees represented by Al-Massry had been arrested during the recent protests against President Sisi, which commenced on 20 September 2019 when hundreds of Egyptians took the streets in Cairo, Alexandria, Damietta, Mahalla al-Kubra and Suez, among other cities.
Police responded by firing tear gas and arresting hundreds.
Media accounts indicate that nearly 500 people have been arrested, most or all arbitrarily, since the protests commenced. However, documentation by local NGOs indicates that as many as 800 people may have been arrested, apparently for “participating in a ‘terrorist group’ operation” and “distributing fake news to disturb the public opinion.”
“The Egyptian authorities must drop the charges against Mahienour al-Massry, promptly release her and immediately stop persecuting, intimidating and interfering with the work of lawyers protecting the rights of others,” said Said Benarbia, Director of ICJ’s Middle East and North Africa Programme.
Mahienour al-Massry was charged in 2013 and again in 2015 for taking part in peaceful protests, for each of which she received one year-long terms of imprisonment.
Mahienour al-Massry’s recent arrest constitutes an effective sanction that violates her right to liberty under article 9 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers.
It also impedes the right of her clients to legal representation under article 14 of the ICCPR.
The ICJ previously filed a submission to the Universal Periodic Review regarding arbitrary arrests and detentions and systematic use of pre-trial detention in Egypt, and documented the use of the Egyptian justice system as a repressive tool to eradicate political expression and human rights work.
“The systematic use of arbitrary arrest and detention by State authorities is one of the very reasons Egyptians took to the street in protest,” said Benarbia.
“The authorities’ response provides further evidence of the widespread violations of rights Egyptians face under the current regime,” he added.
Contact:
Said Benarbia, Director of the ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, t: +41-22-979-3817; e: said.benarbia(a)icj.org
Download:
Egypt-al-Massry-News-web stories-2019-ARA (story in Arabic, PDF)
Sep 16, 2019 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
The ICJ today put the spotlight the increase and “normalisation” of enforce disappearances and abductions worldwide, with examples about Turkey, Egypt and Saudi Arabia, speaking at the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva.
The statement, made during the general debate, reads as follows:
The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) shares concerns highlighted by the Working Group on Enforced and Involuntary Disappearances in its report (UN doc. A/HRC/42/40) at the “increasing use of extraterritorial abductions” and at the “normalization of these practices” globally. ICJ previously documented such practices in our 2017 report, Transnational Injustices.
The killing of Jamal Khashoggi by Saudi Arabia is an example of particular concern, as is the reported abduction, by Turkish authorities, of persons they claim to be linked to “terrorist organisations.” Several of these people, who later reappeared in Turkish prisons, are currently facing serious challenges in mounting a proper legal defence. Complaints of the families have not been properly investigated.
In Egypt, the National Security Agency (NSA) has been abducting and forcibly disappearing hundreds as a technique to suppress dissent. This year, the ICJ and Adalah reported on the disappearance of 138 detainees for between 10 to 219 days, many of whom were subjected to torture.
The ICJ urges the Council to address these worrying developments and calls on all countries:
- to stop all practices of enforced disappearance, abduction or informal international transfer;
- to ratify the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, and
- to provide to the victims of enforced disappearance and their families full access to their rights, including an effective remedy.
Jun 24, 2019 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
At the UN, the ICJ today highlighted the rights and duties of judges and prosecutors to exercise their freedoms of expression, assembly and association to defend the rule of law and human rights.
The oral statement was delivered in a Clustered Interactive Dialogue with the Independent Expert on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity and the Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers, at the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva.
It read as follows:
“The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) welcomes the report of the Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers on freedom of expression, association and peaceful assembly of judges and prosecutors.[1]
As the report acknowledges, exercise of these rights can be subject to restrictions arising from the fundamental need for judges and prosecutors to be perceived as independent and impartial. At the same time, as the report also emphasizes, any such restrictions must be provided by law and be demonstrably necessary to such legitimate aims, which in turn crucially requires proportionality.[2] These standards have been recognized both globally and in all regions of the world.[3] Any such restrictions on judges should be adopted and enforced by the judiciary itself.
We particularly welcome the recognition in the report that in situations where democracy and the rule of law are under threat, judges and prosecutors have not only the right, but potentially a duty, to speak out and organize in defence of democracy, the rule of law, and human rights, and that this can include participating in peaceful public demonstrations.[4]
Far too often in the ICJ’s work around the world, we see Executive and Legislative bodies, as well as compromised judicial hierarchies, arbitrarily or selectively targeting judges and prosecutors for removal, demotion or other disciplinary measures, precisely for exercising these rights to defend against threats to the rule of law. Examples highlighted in our submission to your study included Egypt, Morocco, Honduras, Hungary and Bulgaria.[5]
Mr. Rapporteur, how can judiciaries, governments, and civil society organisations (including international or regional legal professional associations) act internationally to support judges and prosecutors who are facing such abuse in another country?
The ICJ also welcomes the reports of the Independent Expert on protection against violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. We urge all States to strongly support the renewal of this essential mandate at the current session.
Thank you.”
[1] ICJ’s detailed submission to the Special Rapporteur’s consultation is available at: https://www.icj.org/judgesexpression2019/
[2] Paragraphs 39, 45, 46, 89.
[3] In addition to the global and European, Asian, and American standards cited in the report, see the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Fair Trial and Legal Assistance in Africa (2005), paras A(4)(s) and (t), and F(d) and (e).
[4] Paragraphs 61, 69, 90, 102.
[5] See for further information: https://www.icj.org/judgesexpression2019/
